Question for USFS LEO

Gibby1 · Mar 23, 2009

I'm looking at the most recent map.
http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/mbs/projects/evans-creek/evans_final_ea_appenidix_l.pdf

Can you tell us how an ORV licensed vehicle obtains legal access to the trails? I don't see where it is on this map.

I see the 50" wide access for ATV and motorbike, or street legal vehicles wider than 50" but nothing for the ORV licensed 4wd vehicle.

crazybluerider1 · Mar 23, 2009

It also seems like when you exit the 311 at the top you will have to drive all the way through the camp ground to get out to the road if you follow the one way signs. That seem like it could be a hindrance to the campers. It would seem like a better idea to extend the 2 way to the exit of the 311. I would also like to know how ORV tagged vehicles are supposed to access other trails from the camp ground.

dirk · Mar 23, 2009

I'd be happy to drive on the other side of the guardrail...if they would make the ATV/dirt bike lane 30 inches wider :haha:

Gibby1 · Mar 23, 2009

dirk said:
I'd be happy to drive on the other side of the guardrail...if they would make the ATV/dirt bike lane 30 inches wider :haha:

32" wider...

Jaydog · Mar 23, 2009

crazybluerider said:
It also seems like when you exit the 311 at the top you will have to drive all the way through the camp ground to get out to the road if you follow the one way signs. That seem like it could be a hindrance to the campers. It would seem like a better idea to extend the 2 way to the exit of the 311. I would also like to know how ORV tagged vehicles are supposed to access other trails from the camp ground.

That's what happens when people who have no understanding of ORV areas design them.

crazybluerider1 · Mar 23, 2009

Jaydog said:
That's what happens when people who have no understanding of ORV areas design them.

And that's just what I noticed glancing at it for a couple of seconds. It probably took a whole committee a year to come up with it.

dirk · Mar 23, 2009

Jaydog said:
That's what happens when people who have no understanding of ORV areas design them.

This is true, but we (the users) should have provided feedback to the FS...I am kicking myself for not submitting any comments on the proposal :looser:

dirk · Mar 23, 2009

Gibby said:
32" wider...

This isn't a bigger is better kinda thing :haha::haha::haha:

Dogboy · Mar 23, 2009

I don't know if they just didn't put it on there, or what, but where is the upper 311, and the start of the 520? Are those getting removed from the network, or just not in the map?

Also, shouldn't the traffic flow be the opposite direction in the campground? If somebody wants to back their camp trailer into a spot, like most people do, then they either have to make a sharp turn while backing up, or break the direction rule and go backwards so that they can back in more straight. Just a thought.

It would be nice though having a better camp ground like in that map (with a few changes)!

dirk · Mar 23, 2009

Dogboy said:
I don't know if they just didn't put it on there, or what, but where is the upper 311, and the start of the 520? Are those getting removed from the network, or just not in the map?

The upper 311 turns right...before it gets to the campground road. 520 is still there too. Check out page 46 of 132 in the decision notice...to view a revised map of the trails:

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/mbs/projects/evans-creek/evans_final_ea.pdf

Dogboy said:
Also, shouldn't the traffic flow be the opposite direction in the campground? If somebody wants to back their camp trailer into a spot, like most people do, then they either have to make a sharp turn while backing up, or break the direction rule and go backwards so that they can back in more straight. Just a thought.

The feedback the FS received was that most folks trailer a rig up & want to pull nose first into a camp spot...makes unloading/loading the rig much easier.

Murkman · Mar 23, 2009

Over at the Manastash the FS was all proud and puffy chested about their plans for a campground. At least they were that way untill the problems were pointed out. Now at that ORV campground you have group areas and pull-thru parking for trailers. Approach the FS with those ideas and see what comes of it.

Dogboy · Mar 24, 2009

Ok, thanks. Yeah, I hadn't gotten that far yet. I opened all of the pdf.'s, but only skimmed over the 31 page one, not the 132 page one. I'll take then to school and skim over the whole thing. I like to know what is going to happen up there!

pokey · Mar 25, 2009

Murkman said:
Over at the Manastash the FS was all proud and puffy chested about their plans for a campground. At least they were that way untill the problems were pointed out. Now at that ORV campground you have group areas and pull-thru parking for trailers. Approach the FS with those ideas and see what comes of it.

Exactly :awesomework: Things change as they progress. Its still a work in progress.

heep70 · Mar 25, 2009

So as of right now, is the only legal way a non-street legal 4X4 able to get on the trail system is the upper 311?????

I thought they were going to take out the culvert over Evans Creek and put some sort of suspended bridge in just for ORV users to get to the other trails?

Jaydog · Mar 25, 2009

heep70 said:
So as of right now, is the only legal way a non-street legal 4X4 able to get on the trail system is the upper 311?????

I thought they were going to take out the culvert over Evans Creek and put some sort of suspended bridge in just for ORV users to get to the other trails?

Imagine the traffic jam on the upper 311 if they don't

heep70 · Mar 25, 2009

Jaydog said:
Imagine the traffic jam on the upper 311 if they don't

That is what scares me. That trail will be torn up in no time. :booo:

bigred_086 · Mar 25, 2009

2x:corn:

pokey · Mar 25, 2009

Looking at the map it would "appear" that orvs can exit the campground and turn right to access the trail system on the 7920. I know the plan was to have everything legal from the campground entrance up. Non legal vehicles still will not be allowed on the road from the park entrance to the campground entrance though. The map has changed from the original design but I believe the intent is still the same.

Fordzuki · Mar 25, 2009

You just have to put your drivers side tires on the guardrail. :redneck:

Dogboy is right, the angled camping on the right as you go through the new part of the loop, would be a little tricky with a camper, let alone nosing a towrig/trailer combo into.

In reality, it looks like a decent plan, and with a few changes (or clarifications) it should work out better than the current setup. If what pokey says pans out, (about being able to run non street legal rigs from the campground entrance up), then "we" actually got what we wanted. More camping, more parking, and a defined route to the trails.

Basically, I think it could be alot worse.

*Edit: On second look at the map, I don't think that's the case. It looks as though the "all vehicles" boundary is at the area between the day parking and current campground entrance. Guardrail guys, guardrail. :awesomework:

Dogboy · Mar 26, 2009

Fordzuki said:
You just have to put your drivers side tires on the guardrail. :redneck:

Dogboy is right, the angled camping on the right as you go through the new part of the loop, would be a little tricky with a camper, let alone nosing a towrig/trailer combo into.

In reality, it looks like a decent plan, and with a few changes (or clarifications) it should work out better than the current setup. If what pokey says pans out, (about being able to run non street legal rigs from the campground entrance up), then "we" actually got what we wanted. More camping, more parking, and a defined route to the trails.

Basically, I think it could be alot worse.

*Edit: On second look at the map, I don't think that's the case. It looks as though the "all vehicles" boundary is at the area between the day parking and current campground entrance. Guardrail guys, guardrail. :awesomework:

I kinda wonder if that 100 yards or what ever it will be between the new campground entrance, and the day use area, would be a road (it obviously will be), but maybe they would allow all ORV's on that stretch so that they can reach the trails system. If they don't "allow" ORV's on that stretch, you are going to find A LOT of people breaking the law, I can guarantee that.

I know over in Eastern Washington, they have done that sort of thing with a few roads. They will make a 1-2 mile stretch that is legal for motorcycles, kids, buggies, quads, everything, to be on, because opening those stretches allow the trail networks to be available to more than just street legal vehicles, and dual sport motorcycles.

Just a thought.